Lite-licensing suggested for South Africa

ICASA has been very helpful so far with the trial project being run in Cape Town and it is a real possibility that this concept will be implemented, if there is sufficient organised momentum behind it. There are a number of details which would need to be ironed out, but the sooner this is aired for discussion, the sooner it will become reality.
 
Sounds like a gud idea.....Hope the DoC will atleast consider it.
 
I don't like it. ISM bands are a free for all and that's exactly why they're popular. If you want private spectrum, get out of the ISM bands. It's not about efficient spectrum allocation, it's about providing a band that's available for NO effort, to everyone. It's about providing the minimum amount of government interference required to keep things non-violent.

I still don't see how lite-licensing differs from regular licensing. Is price the only difference? Because from the explanation in the article, it seems like there's still going to be the same amount of ICASA bureaucracy, except this time there'll be 100x more applications so the wheels are really going to fall off.

WAPA moved into the ISM bands (which work fine for hobbyists, home users and clued up professionals), and now they want to claim them for themselves. "Free public spectrum"? More like "Free public spectrum except for the R 10 000 application form preparation costs, ICASA fees and oh, if you happen to arrive second, no spectrum for you".

WAPA, you can use our public spectrum, on the same terms as everyone else. Don't come here with your bureaucratic tendencies.
 
Drunkard #1 said:
I don't like it. ISM bands are a free for all and that's exactly why they're popular. If you want private spectrum, get out of the ISM bands. It's not about efficient spectrum allocation, it's about providing a band that's available for NO effort, to everyone. It's about providing the minimum amount of government interference required to keep things non-violent.

I still don't see how lite-licensing differs from regular licensing. Is price the only difference? Because from the explanation in the article, it seems like there's still going to be the same amount of ICASA bureaucracy, except this time there'll be 100x more applications so the wheels are really going to fall off.

WAPA moved into the ISM bands (which work fine for hobbyists, home users and clued up professionals), and now they want to claim them for themselves. "Free public spectrum"? More like "Free public spectrum except for the R 10 000 application form preparation costs, ICASA fees and oh, if you happen to arrive second, no spectrum for you".

WAPA, you can use our public spectrum, on the same terms as everyone else. Don't come here with your bureaucratic tendencies.
Click to expand...

fair enough #1, but you are also exhibiting classic conclusionist tendencies. this is more about spectrum above 20GHz and the chunk between 490-790MHz and not about changing the current ISM allocation. High ranges such as V-band and E-band are currently not usable only because of the spectrum licence fees - lite-licensing would aim to free these resources up for use

the attraction of lite-licensing is it does not involve Govt or ICASA other than to authorise a band manager to run the framework and the entire process is automated so should be cheaper and more efficient.

there is an element of first-come-first-served but that is still a massive improvement from the current first-come-with-heaps-of-cash-only-served model
 
dominic said:
fair enough #1, but you are also exhibiting classic conclusionist tendencies. this is more about spectrum above 20GHz and the chunk between 490-790MHz and not about changing the current ISM allocation. High ranges such as V-band and E-band are currently not usable only because of the spectrum licence fees - lite-licensing would aim to free these resources up for use

the attraction of lite-licensing is it does not involve Govt or ICASA other than to authorise a band manager to run the framework and the entire process is automated so should be cheaper and more efficient.

there is an element of first-come-first-served but that is still a massive improvement from the current first-come-with-heaps-of-cash-only-served model
Click to expand...

The article didn't mention the bands involved, it just mentioned ISM a lot.

So we're looking at the currently unavailable digital dividend spectrum and the currently unusable 20GHz+, V-band and E-band spectrum only (I had to look that one up, and Wikipedia suggests that those last two aren't only limited by licence fees, but also by short range and a line-of-sight requirement).

And we're suggesting that a private organisation take over ICASA's job because they're incompetent baboons who spend most of their days trying not to offend litigious, abusive telcos and have no incentive to become a functional, useful organisation.

I don't think that any spectrum should be wasted because of historical politics. If ICASA was competent they'd allocate all spectrum efficiently, including that unused spectrum. But they aren't, so maybe this plan has merit, but is the super-valuable digital dividend spectrum really the place to test it? What about fixing ICASA, or is that near impossible and politically undesirable?

Once radios that use the "WiGig" standard become available, that spectrum should be opened up too. Not kept from the public by WAPA.
 
Drunkard #1 said:
The article didn't mention the bands involved, it just mentioned ISM a lot.

So we're looking at the currently unavailable digital dividend spectrum and the currently unusable 20GHz+, V-band and E-band spectrum only (I had to look that one up, and Wikipedia suggests that those last two aren't only limited by licence fees, but also by short range and a line-of-sight requirement).

And we're suggesting that a private organisation take over ICASA's job because they're incompetent baboons who spend most of their days trying not to offend litigious, abusive telcos and have no incentive to become a functional, useful organisation.

I don't think that any spectrum should be wasted because of historical politics. If ICASA was competent they'd allocate all spectrum efficiently, including that unused spectrum. But they aren't, so maybe this plan has merit, but is the super-valuable digital dividend spectrum really the place to test it? What about fixing ICASA, or is that near impossible and politically undesirable?

Once radios that use the "WiGig" standard become available, that spectrum should be opened up too. Not kept from the public by WAPA.
Click to expand...

The article does not say ISM for lite-licensed.

V and E-band are usable - there is type-approved kit available. While the spectrum licence fee regulations do create incentives for using higher bands this is offset in the high GHz bands by the size of the channel required (@ R2000 per MHz paired)

we all know the problems with ICASA - lite-licensing would help by taking away a practical function (radio-coordination etc) which it currently by its own admission cannot do

the proposal for 490MHz + is to allocate it as licence exempt on a secondary basis subject to a lite-licensing system. imo this would be the best way to unlock the value of the extended dividend

not sure about your "WAPA keeping spectrum from the public" line of argument....lite-licensing would be open to all who want to use it subject to licensing / licence exemption requirements
 
Drunkard #1 said:
I don't like it. ISM bands are a free for all and that's exactly why they're popular. If you want private spectrum, get out of the ISM bands. It's not about efficient spectrum allocation, it's about providing a band that's available for NO effort, to everyone. It's about providing the minimum amount of government interference required to keep things non-violent.

I still don't see how lite-licensing differs from regular licensing. Is price the only difference? Because from the explanation in the article, it seems like there's still going to be the same amount of ICASA bureaucracy, except this time there'll be 100x more applications so the wheels are really going to fall off.

WAPA moved into the ISM bands (which work fine for hobbyists, home users and clued up professionals), and now they want to claim them for themselves. "Free public spectrum"? More like "Free public spectrum except for the R 10 000 application form preparation costs, ICASA fees and oh, if you happen to arrive second, no spectrum for you".

WAPA, you can use our public spectrum, on the same terms as everyone else. Don't come here with your bureaucratic tendencies.
Click to expand...

Hi Drunkard. I'm glad we can clear up this issue. The lite-licensing is proposed as a more efficient way to disburse new spectrum ranges, rather than to re-do the ISM band.

One of the key spectrum bands we propose under this method is the spectrum freed up from digital broadcasting. We are already testing the system we propose, within these bands, in a project in Cape Town (see separate articles on TV White Spaces).

Note that spectrum which was allocated for Wimax is totally under-utilised. A few players have been allocated and are either not using, or under-using. Other players have requested but not been allocated. Meanwhile a whole lot of valuable, quality spectrum sits dormant and South Africa remains with sub-standard broadband (in terms of quality, speed and pricing). These are the issues we plan to address. Not all all to 'take over' ISM for exclusive use.

I hope that clarifies and look forward to your support in our quest for a better system for all.
 
The article only mentioned ISM bands, so I am with Drunkard here.

In all honesty, if WAPA wants to make good use of spectrum then Wifi in its current form is not the answer. Secondly, the reason the ISM bands exist is to enable consumers to operate small cell home networks. I dont really like the use of wifi for backhaul by ISPs. Perhaps if, like you say, the higher frequency ranges were used on a "lite licenced" basis it would be a better option, however in the same situation MW would still be the preferred option for carrier-grade backhaul.

The use of small coordinated wifi cells would be great, but how do you translate this to the consumer? every private citizen has the same right to the spectrum as WAPA/ISPs so its a bit of a nightmare in that regard.
 
SteveO said:
The article only mentioned ISM bands, so I am with Drunkard here.

In all honesty, if WAPA wants to make good use of spectrum then Wifi in its current form is not the answer. Secondly, the reason the ISM bands exist is to enable consumers to operate small cell home networks. I dont really like the use of wifi for backhaul by ISPs. Perhaps if, like you say, the higher frequency ranges were used on a "lite licenced" basis it would be a better option, however in the same situation MW would still be the preferred option for carrier-grade backhaul.

The use of small coordinated wifi cells would be great, but how do you translate this to the consumer? every private citizen has the same right to the spectrum as WAPA/ISPs so its a bit of a nightmare in that regard.
Click to expand...

Hi Steveo. Fair enough - the article was not clear enough.

The ISM bands are currently planning an enormously useful roll as per previous article on the WAPA census. It fills a need in high-density urban areas where last-mile access much more of an issue than one would think. It fills a need in rural areas, where Telkom has even 'given up' on restoring services for financial years (and notified residence as such). In those cases it is more than internet - it is basic communication with the outside world. It also fills a need in the significant, under-served areas where such members are basically the 'only hope' in the near future. WAPA members also connect dozens of schools (often at no cost), medical institutions etc and even move time-sensitive information such as x-ray images in real time.

The point is that all this is done by necessity on unregulated spectrum and it is through pure innovation and passion that the industry has achieved so much. Microwave point-to-point links are an option for backhaul, but there is still an access issue and there are often delays with backhaul spectrum allocation.

How much more could WAPA members and ISPs in general do with access to quality spectrum which was at least regulated to the point where interference was mitigated. At least the USA recognises this, as well as forward thinking industry players, and projects are going ahead. The TV-white-space projects in various countries have yielded successful trials and even implementation.

The alternative licensing model (winner-takes-all), often associated with hefty fees, has been shown to have limitations. The ICASA national survey around the country proved that >90% of allocated spectrum is unused. That is a terrible indictment of the current licensing regime because this spectrum is regarded as so scarce, and so many honest investors really do want to invest in providing quality broadband services.

The main point (more than any other) is that we need to collectively lobby for this in South Africa so that it happens sooner rather than later. We want to see pervasive, quality, fast, low-cost broadband to bring massive social and economic benefits to every South African. I hope we can get the support of forumites.
 
Would love to support - anything more, cheaper bandwidth :).

How do we get the lobbying going?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X